Imperial County Air Pollution Control District: members and duties.

Section 40100.8.2, which would have prohibited the Imperial County Air Pollution Control District from issuing any major air permit (defined as a permit issued to a Title V source), has been entirely removed from the bill.

The effective date for the new governing board structure was moved up from March 1, 2028 to July 1, 2027, and the repeal of old provisions was moved up from January 1, 2029 to January 1, 2028.

The deadline for the district to post all permit applications within three business days of receipt was extended from July 1, 2027 to January 1, 2029.

A new board member was added: a representative from an irrigation district that provides water and retail power services in Imperial County and is a member of the governing board of a water agency under Section 12512 of the Water Code. The total board size increased from 10 to 11 members.

The agricultural public member requirement was tightened to require the person be actively working in commercial agricultural commodity production with experience on lands serving an agricultural use, and definitions for 'agricultural commodity' and 'agricultural use' were added.

A new provision requires the district to establish a process allowing permitholders with sensitive operations (including animal husbandry) to request redaction of physical identifying information such as addresses from publicly posted data, though facilities must still be identified at least by ZIP Code and the public can still request full information via public records requests.

A new provision requires air monitoring data to be made available on the district website within a reasonable period not exceeding 14 months from the date of collection, and requires the governing board to establish an air monitoring data program defining timeframes based on testing methodology.

The search parameters for permit information on the website were expanded to include 'address or ZIP Code' as a searchable field, and a deadline of January 1, 2029 was added for posting Air Toxics Hot Spots documents.

All provisions adding Sections 21185.5 and 21185.6 to the Public Resources Code are removed. This eliminates CEQA streamlining benefits for Waterfront Environmental Leadership Development Projects (WELDPs) located in the Central Embarcadero Planning District of the San Diego Unified Port District, including shortened Coastal Commission review periods, expedited port master plan amendment filing, and fee authority for the Coastal Commission.

The operative date for the Imperial County Air Pollution Control District governing board restructuring (Section 40100.8) is moved up from March 1, 2028 to July 1, 2027. Corresponding inoperative and repeal dates for prior law are also shifted earlier (inoperative July 1, 2027; repealed January 1, 2028).

The deadline for the air district to migrate all existing data to its new standalone internet website is changed from December 2028 to January 1, 2028.

Section numbering is adjusted following the removal of the CEQA provisions. A blank section placeholder appears and Section 40100.8.5 is renumbered from SEC. 8 to SEC. 7.

Added an entirely new part of the bill (Sections 40100, 40100.5, 40100.8, 40100.8.2, 40100.8.5, and 40701.5 of the Health and Safety Code) establishing a special statute for the Imperial County Air Pollution Control District, effective March 1, 2028.

Added legislative findings declaring a special statute is necessary for Imperial County due to its growing population and goal of addressing climate change and air pollution, and findings that the website transparency requirements further constitutional public access provisions.

Prescribed a 10-member governing board for the Imperial County Air Pollution Control District: one supervisor-appointed member, five city council members (one per supervisorial district, no more than two per city), and four public members with specific backgrounds - a physician or public health professional focused on air pollution effects on vulnerable populations, an environmental justice representative from burdened communities, a labor/worker safety person, and an agricultural practices person. All members must reside in the district and serve four-year terms.

Required the Imperial County Air Pollution Control District to create a separate website by December 2028 posting agendas, minutes, searchable permit information, enforcement actions, notices of violation, air toxics data, and budget. Required posting of all permit applications within three business days of receipt (by July 1, 2027) and consideration of public comments before final action.

Required the district to develop a comprehensive air monitoring plan by December 2028 including monitors in most impacted communities for speciated carbon particulate matter and toxic air contaminants, with data posted within 14 months of collection. Required an annual air quality report covering pollutant levels, enforcement actions, revenue, program outcomes, and emissions reduction progress.

Required the district to evaluate its public complaint process by December 2028, including a 24-hour hotline, response within 48 hours, whistleblower protections, and posting of complaints (without naming the facility) on its website.

Required the district governing board to consult with the United States Navy and Marine Corps on all permitting, rules, regulations, and planning issues that could impact their mission, and to designate a liaison member after consultation with the armed forces.

Prohibited the Imperial County Air Pollution Control District from issuing major air permits (Title V source permits) during a temporary period - the prohibition is inoperative as of March 1, 2028 and repealed January 1, 2029.

Added the Imperial County Air Pollution Control District to funding provisions requiring an annual per capita assessment on cities and county when other funding sources are insufficient, with a public hearing at least 30 days before the assessment is imposed. Board member compensation set at up to $100 per day or $1,000 per month.

Changed the mandate reimbursement provision from a flat 'no reimbursement required' statement to a more nuanced approach: some mandates do not require reimbursement because local agencies can levy fees or because they fall within public access constitutional provisions, but other mandates may require reimbursement if the Commission on State Mandates determines costs are state-mandated.

Changed operative dates for existing air district board membership provisions (Sections 40100 and 40100.5) from March 1, 2021 to March 1, 2028, with repeal as of January 1, 2029, aligning them with the new Imperial County provisions.

The location requirement changed from 'within the Central Embarcadero Planning District of the San Diego Unified Port District' to 'within the Central Embarcadero Planning District of the port within the County of San Diego,' broadening eligibility beyond just the San Diego Unified Port District to any port in the county.

The Coastal Commission deadline was narrowed and shortened: from 180 days for 'any project-related approval, including any administrative appeals' (measured from application filing or appeal filing) to 90 days specifically for a port master plan amendment (measured from receipt of materials on the required list).

Removed the exception that paused the decision clock when the Coastal Commission filed an action challenging EIR adequacy, prepared a subsequent EIR, or assumed the lead agency role. The Assembly version contains no such carve-out.

Added new paragraph (e) as operative law: the Coastal Commission shall not constructively deny a WELDP by imposing conditions in a conditional approval of a coastal development permit under de novo review that are not objectively necessary for consistency with the certified port master plan and Chapter 3 of Division 20, and that render the project practically infeasible. This was previously only Senate intent language.

Removed two blocks of 'It is the intent of the Senate Natural Resources and Water Committee' language (one about extending pre-certification review to Coastal Act approvals, one about limiting denial authority), replacing the latter with actual operative text in new paragraph (e).

Added formal definitions for 'Final action on the appeal' (approval, approval with conditions, or denial of a coastal development permit under de novo review) and 'Objective standard' (a verifiable external standard knowable by the public that does not require subjective judgment), which were previously only inline text.

The bill's streamlining benefits are now directed solely at the California Coastal Commission rather than all responsible agencies. References to 'responsible agency' throughout are replaced with 'Coastal Commission,' and a new definition of 'Port' is added, defined as the San Diego Unified Port District as lead agency.

The detailed anti-denial provision (former subdivision (e)) that prohibited responsible agencies from denying a lead-agency-approved project or imposing infeasibility-rendering conditions unless they made specific findings (unmitigable environmental impacts, inconsistency with objective standards, or adverse public health/safety impacts) is entirely removed. It is replaced only by a non-operative legislative intent statement about limiting the Coastal Commission's denial authority.

A new subdivision (d) addresses appeals: if the Coastal Commission finds an appeal raises a substantial issue under the Coastal Act, it must take final action within 180 days. If a WELDP is consistent with objective standards in the certified port master plan, those issues cannot be grounds for finding a substantial issue.

New requirements for port master plan amendments: within 30 days of submittal, the Coastal Commission must provide a complete list of documents needed to evaluate consistency with the Coastal Act, and may not request additional materials beyond that list unless significant changes are made. The amendment must include objective standards for building heights, setbacks, step-backs, view corridors, lower cost overnight accommodations, and mitigation ratios for marine and coastal habitat impacts.

A new 90-day deadline is added requiring the Coastal Commission to make a final determination on a port master plan amendment within 90 days of receiving the listed materials, in addition to the existing 180-day deadline for project-related approvals and appeals.

A new Section 3 adds legislative findings and declarations that a special statute is necessary due to unique needs of the urban waterfront in San Diego County, addressing potential constitutional challenges under Article IV, Section 16 (one-subject rule). The former Section 3 (reimbursement) is renumbered as Section 4.

The fee authority for processing costs is narrowed from any 'responsible agency' to specifically the Coastal Commission only.

The bill now applies only to Waterfront Environmental Leadership Development Projects (WELDPs), defined as projects certified by the Governor that propose 1,000,000 or more square feet of new waterfront development, enhance public access to the waterfront, and are located on more than 50 acres within the Central Embarcadero Planning District of the San Diego Unified Port District. Previously it applied to all Governor-certified environmental leadership development projects statewide.

Most references to 'responsible agency' were changed to specifically name the 'California Coastal Commission,' narrowing which agencies must comply with the 60-day comment deadline, 180-day decision deadline, and denial restrictions. The fee provision in Section 21185.6 also now names the Coastal Commission specifically.

The entire provision amending Section 14575 of the Public Resources Code (regarding beverage container recycling processing payments and the 10 percent reasonable financial return for recycling centers) was removed from the bill.

The 60-day comment waiver now explicitly applies only to comments made prior to certification of the environmental impact report, and a new exception states the waiver does not apply to new information arising after the comment period ends. A Senate intent statement was added indicating the 60-day review should also apply to documents submitted for California Coastal Act approvals.

The 180-day final determination deadline now includes an exception: it does not apply where the Coastal Commission files an action challenging EIR adequacy, prepares a subsequent EIR, or assumes the lead agency role.

A new Senate intent statement (paragraph 5) expresses the committee's intent to limit the Coastal Commission's ability to deny a WELDP or impose infeasibility-rendering conditions unless it makes specific findings that the project is inconsistent with the California Coastal Act or certified port master plan, or has adverse impacts on public health or safety.

The fee agreement provision now allows the written agreement to be 'amended from time to time,' giving more flexibility in adjusting fees.

The state-mandated local program determination changed from 'no' to 'yes,' indicating the bill now imposes new duties on local agencies that trigger reimbursement analysis under the California Constitution.

Added new Sections 21185.5 and 21185.6 to the Public Resources Code, expanding the bill from solely addressing beverage container processing fees to also covering CEQA streamlining for Governor-certified environmental leadership development projects.

The state-mandated local program designation changed from 'no' to 'yes' in the legislative counsel's digest, reflecting that the new CEQA provisions impose duties on local agencies as responsible agencies.

Responsible agencies must provide specific and substantive comments or objections within 60 days of receiving technical reports and submittals; comments not provided within that window are deemed waived.

The lead agency or applicant must file required application forms and materials with the responsible agency no later than 30 days after certification of the environmental impact report by the lead agency.

Responsible agencies must make a final determination on any project-related approval, including administrative appeals, within 180 days of the date the application was filed (or the appeal was filed if the agency has only appellate authority).

A responsible agency may not deny an environmental leadership project approved by the lead agency or impose conditions that render the project infeasible unless it makes a specific finding: unmitigable significant environmental impacts, inconsistency with codified objective standards, or a specific adverse impact on public health or safety with no feasible mitigation.

Responsible agencies may charge applicants a fee for reasonable costs incurred processing documents for review of the environmental leadership project, provided the fee is set forth in a written agreement with the applicant before being charged.

A new section provides that no state reimbursement is required under Article XIII B of the California Constitution because local agencies have authority to levy service charges, fees, or assessments sufficient to cover the mandated program.